Find court opinions that match your case.
Search 312,996+ US court opinions imported from the Caselaw Access Project — Supreme Court, federal circuits, and state high courts. Filter by practice area, state, outcome, and connect with the attorneys who tried them.
Latest Opinions · freshly imported court decisions
The most recent court rulings now available in the library. Click through for the full opinion, the attorneys involved, and related cases.
Blanchard v. Steward Carney Hosp., Inc.
Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Bd.
Commonwealth v. Gomes
Marchese v. Bos. Redevelopment Auth.
Veolia Energy Bos., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessors of Bos.
Bos. Globe Media Partners, LLC v. Chief Justice of the Trial Court
Commonwealth v. Reyes
United States v. Block
1911 Cases
217 matching opinions . Filter by practice area below, or use the search above for free-text matching against title and syllabus.
Browse by State 28
Browse by Year 40
Muskrat v. United States
MUSKRAT v. UNITED STATES. BROWN AND GRITTS v. UNITED STATES. APPEALS EROM TOT COURT OP CLAIMS. Nos. 330, 331. Argued November 30 and December 1, 2, 1910. Decided January 23, 1911. The rule laid down in Heyburn’s Case, 2 Dall. 409, that‘ nei
Sexton v. Dreyfus
SEXTON, AS TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF KESSLER & COMPANY, v. DREYFUS. SAME v. LLOYD’S BANK, LTD. APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COUR't. OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. Nos. 662, 663. Submitted January 6,1911. Decided January 23, 1911. Under the B
William W. Bierce, Ltd. v. Waterhouse
WILLIAM W. BIERCE, LIMITED, v. WATERHOUSE. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF HAWAII. No. 508. Argued December 12, 1910. Decided January 16, 1911. This court disapproves'of the practice, followed by an intermediate appellate cou
German Alliance Insurance v. Hale
GERMAN ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY v. HALE. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP ALABAMA. No. 56. Argued and submitted November 29, 1910. Decided January 16, 1911. The business of fire insurance is of
Reaves v. Ainsworth
REAVES v. AINSWORTH, MAJOR GENERAL. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT. OF COLUMBIA. No. 14. Argued December 2, 5, 1910. Decided January 9, 1911. Under the act of October 1, 1890, c. 1241, 26 Stat. 562, regulating examinations an
Brodnax v. Missouri
BRODNAX v. STATE OF MISSOURI. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI, No. 598. Argued December 14, 1910. Decided January 9, 1911. In this case, as the statute snows.on its face that the subject regulated needed to be regulated
House v. Mayes
HOUSE v. MAYES, MARSHAL OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI. No. 597. Argued December 13, 14, 1910. Decided January 9, 1911. The following fundamental principles are not open to dispute: The Gove
United States v. Chamberlin
UNITED STATES v. CHAMBERLIN. CERTIORARI TO £HE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 77. Argued December 16, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. An action lies by the United States to recover the amount of a stamp tax upon executi
Bailey v. Alabama
BAILEY v. STATE OF ALABAMA. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA. No. 300. Argued October 20, 21, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. Prima facie evidence is sufficient to outweigh the presumption of innocence, and, if not met by o
In re Gregory
MATTER OF GREGORY, PETITIONER. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. No. 17, Original. Argued December 5, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. Habeas corpus cannot be-made to perform the functions of a writ of error, and this court is concerned onl
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Scott
LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY v. SCOTT. ERROR TO THE COURT OP APPEALS OP THE COMMONWEALTH OP KENTUCKY. No. 286. Argued October 19, 20, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. Decided on authority of Atlantic Coast Line R. R. Co. v. Riversi
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Riverside Mills
ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY v. RIVERSIDE MILLS. ERROR TO.THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA. No. 215. Argued October 19, 20, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. A provision in a bill of lading is
United States v. Grizzard
UNITED STATES v. GRIZZARD. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. No. 66. Argued December 6, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. The compensation to be awarded under the Fifth Amendment for an actua
Fore River Shipbuilding Co. v. Hagg
FORE RIVER SHIPBUILDING COMPANY v. HAGG. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR - THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. No. 75. Submitted December 16, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. This court takes notice of, and inquires as to, its
Spokane & British Columbia Railway Co. v. Washington & Great Northern Railway Co.
SPOKANE AND BRITISH COLUMBIA RAILWAY COMPANY v. WASHINGTON AND GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON.- No. 49. Submitted November 29, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. No one can take advantage o
Kentucky Union Co. v. Kentucky
KENTUCKY UNION COMPANY v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY. EASTERN KENTUCKY COAL LANDS CORPORATION v. SAME. SAME v. SAME. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OB' THE STATE OF KENTUCKY. Nos. 22, 47, 48. Argued October 28, 31, 1910. Decided January 3, 191
Engel v. O'Malley
ENGEL v. O’MALLEY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES . FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 703. Argued December 15, 16, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. The rule, that one not within the class cannot raise objections t
Assaria State Bank v. Dolley
ASSARIA STATE BANK v. DOLLEY, BANK COMMISSIONER OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS. No. 617. Argued December 8, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. Noble State Bank v. Haskell, a
Shallenberger v. First State Bank of Holstein
SHALLENBERGER, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA, v. FIRST STATE BANK OF HOLSTEIN, NEBRASKA. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE DISTRICT OP NEBRASKA. No. 445. Argued December 8, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. Followi
Noble State Bank v. Haskell
NOBLE STATE BANK v. HASKELL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. No. 71. Argued December 7, 8, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. The charter of a corporation which is subject to the usual reserved powers to alter or repeal is'
West Side Belt Railroad v. Pittsburgh Construction Co.
WEST SIDE BELT RAILROAD COMPANY v. PITTSBURGH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA. . No. 681. Motion to dismiss or affirm. Submitted December 5, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. When plaintiff in erro
Hendrix v. United States
HENDRIX v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. No. 319. Argued November 28, 29, 1910: Decided January 3, 1911. The United States court at a particular place named is a sufficien
United States v. Barber
UNITED STATES v. BARBER. ERROR to THE DISTRICT COURT ' OF the united states FOR THE DISTRICT. OF IDAHO. No. 444. Argued October 17, 18, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. On an appeal under the Criminal Appeals Act of March 2,1907, c. 2564, 34
American Land Co. v. Zeiss
AMERICAN LAND COMPANY v. ZEISS. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 230. Argued October 14, 17, 1910. Decided January 3, 1911. The general welfare of society is involved in the security and registry of t
Need an attorney for a case like these?
Browse 7,507+ verified US attorneys whose names appear in real court opinions. Filter by practice area and state to find someone with relevant experience.